Donal Rumsfeld: The Peril of Deep Defense Cuts

Wall Street Journal ^ | June 30, 2011 | Donald Rumsfeld

[Clairity]

It will be tempting to accede to the White House's proposal to carve out $400 billion, if not more, from the national security budget by 2023. It would also be a grievous mistake.

The critical difference between today and past eras, however, is that the proliferation of biological, chemical and even nuclear weapons means that America's margin for error is considerably more modest.

Defense spending is now 19% of federal outlays and declining. This is the lowest percentage since before World War II. At 4.7% of GDP, the defense budget is dwarfed by the cost of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, which exceed 10% of GDP. Even if President Obama tomorrow brought home each and every troop in Iraq and Afghanistan, tore down the Pentagon, shuttered the CIA and the national security agencies of government, and pink-slipped the three million men and women defending the country, it would not solve America's financial woes.

[Clairity]

An excellent detailed, factual article by Rumsfeld. Worth the time to read it and bookmark it for the future. I am adding it to my FR home page too.

[ohioman]

Nice post and excellent article. Sadly, there are too many all too eager to start hacking at our military. I hope these leftist traitors are paid back in full some day.

[ilovesarah2012]

Who is “Donal Rumsfeld”?

[Old Teufel Hunden]

The most important area of cutting he mentions IMO is some of our overseas bases. Especially the ones in Western Europe. The Soviets aren’t coming through the Fulda Gap anytime soon. This was the whole basis for some of these huge bases during the cold war. Sure, we probably need to have airforce bases in some of these places so we can transport our personnel but our forward deployed overseas bases need to be concentrated in the Middle East and the Pacific. These are where our current threats are. We have these bases already. We need to close a lot of the ones in Western Europe.

[Colonel Kangaroo]

Cut too much out of our defense budget and we'll not be able to have more than three or four wars/interventions/nation buildings/humanitarian missions going on at one time.

And remember, we must spend our way into a sea of debt so our NATO allies don't have to sweat too hard for their own defense.

[exDemMom]

The most important area of cutting he mentions IMO is some of our overseas bases. Especially the ones in Western Europe. The Soviets aren’t coming through the Fulda Gap anytime soon. This was the whole basis for some of these huge bases during the cold war. Sure, we probably need to have airforce bases in some of these places so we can transport our personnel but our forward deployed overseas bases need to be concentrated in the Middle East and the Pacific. These are where our current threats are. We have these bases already. We need to close a lot of the ones in Western Europe.

You may be right. Those bases, however, are popular duty stations for troops (join the military and see the world), and that may be a consideration for decision makers. Also, cutting all the bases may make sense in the light of current threat, but what about future threat? They may turn out to be crucial. It's hard to negotiate the establishment of a new base when negotiating from the position of great need.

[Bean Counter]

yep...well written and on target article, and he’s right...the consequences of Premier Hussein’s decisions now won’t be obvious for years, and it will be too late to fix them when the problems finally do manifest themselves.

But some problems are already obvious. The so-called “Arab Street” rose up in the vacuum left when the US Navy withdrew its standing aircraft carrier task force from the Mediterranean. One of the only reasons Libya toed the line for so long is because Kadaffy knew the US Navy was always in range, and ready to intervene the moment he acted up. By the time Premier Hussein decided to intervene it was far too late to do much of anything because the situation was allowed to go beyond any reasonable control.

I’m not trying to make an argument for further intervention in Libya; but I do believe we could have nipped it in the bud long ago and our failure to do so is why the fighting continues today.

[Clairity]

My misbehaving keyboard! I hate it when it happens, and in the title, too... ;(

[ilovesarah2012]

LOL

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Also, cutting all the bases may make sense in the light of current threat, but what about future threat?"

I'm looking at future threats and somehow they all look to be in the region of southwest Asia and south and northeast Asia. Which is where IMO we should have bases (and we already do). As I mention, I think we should still keep Air Force type basis in Western Europe for purposes of moving troops there and in other places, but other than that I don't see a reason to have say, an armored division in Western Europe.

You mention the popular duty station angle. One, the recruiting for the military is up all across the board. We are not having any type of recruiting problem. Secondly, the Navy can have that as a selling point with port calls all over the world, but the Army should be concentrating on where best it can have it's forces. That's the primary concern.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"The so-called “Arab Street” rose up in the vacuum left when the US Navy withdrew its standing aircraft carrier task force from the Mediterranean."

I did not know this. Is this because we have needed more carrier task forces in and around the Presian Gulf, Gulf of Aden and Arabian Sea for Iraq and Afghanistan? Or does it have to do with less deployments due to budget constraints?

[Roninf5-1]

At 4.7% of GDP, the defense budget is dwarfed by the cost of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, which exceed 10% of GDP. Even if President Obama tomorrow brought home each and every troop in Iraq and Afghanistan, tore down the Pentagon, shuttered the CIA and the national security agencies of government, and pink-slipped the three million men and women defending the country, it would not solve America's financial woes.

He's right. Get rid of Socialist Security and Mediscam, too!

[Bean Counter]

Not sure what the reason was, but this year is the first time in something like 35 years that there has been no continuous carrier task force in the Med, and I know that because I deployed a number of times in support of those carrier task forces...